About your Search

20120926
20121004
STATION
CSPAN 23
LANGUAGE
English 23
Search Results 0 to 22 of about 23 (some duplicates have been removed)
is a joke, but it's quite serious. when i met gingrich i said i hope the election is not lost by the republicans on the color line. it seems like it's almost over although i wish him well. host: an independent scholar, ann in virginia. caller: i will be watching, definitely. in fact, it's probably going to be the highest watched debates ever, just because people are anxious to see what mitt romney will talk about, because he has gone this far and it feels to me like his campaign has been i am not barack obama. we want to hear specifics. i am just concerned and his approach. i just want to see what it's going to be. i voted for the president the last election even though i am independent. there's a lot about the republican platform, the party platform that i agree with and there's a lot about the democratic party platform i don't agree with. but when it comes to leadership, it has been really embarrassing to watch mitt romney. it is just sad. so this will be his chance. peter he will pull it off or not. i am not going to vote for him just because of-principle of- he will pull i
gingrich agree we needed immigration reform. what about the border effect that there were having this conversation. it was completely ignored. mayor ronnie gave a speech -- mitt romney gave a speech. this is an utterly marginal issue. it has more skilled immigration than you do less. this is not mean any kind of changes. it is also true that the immigration debate is framed in some ways and others by others. i guess i see these emergence strategies versus ... strategies. when you're talking about a party. you have this large number of non-college educated white voters. these folks are facing these economic structural changes. they have anxieties that flow from that. in 2004, you won a lot of these voters. suddenly you are counting social security reform. that is something that democrats capitalize on effectively in 2005. on the other hand you look at the affordable care act. what happened? you have this republican party where they recognize a lot of our voters are older. a lot have anxiety. there is this an emerging strategy in which you have thinkers saying they are creating a n
, the next day i had tens of thousands of hits. people had gone to the web and looked up what newt gingrich was talking about. >> another question -- recently, one of mitt romney's operatives made the statement to reporters when they were pushing him on the claim about welfare. we will keep running that, we will not have our campaign did but -- dictated by fact checkers. probably a lot of news people were shocked by the cynicism they heard coming out of his mouth. jim, you have been around the longest -- did this surprise you? >> i really cannot say that i was. they had kind of behave that way all along. they were certainly not terribly worried enough to change the rhetoric when something is pointed out to them. >> you mean the romney campaign? >> yes. i do not see a lot of evidence of trimming statements back to make a more accurate when they are repeated -- >> i do not know about that. this is -- my take on this, in the context of that question and answer, they were saying that this is the most effective ad. they said, that got four pinocchios. the response was, we are not going to let ou
with john t. sick and newt gingrich in 1997, and eat a balanced budget. it got the job done. the balanced the budget. we were paying off debt. the unemployment rate was going down. other than that it did not work. i did not like the welfare bill, because it did not provide the kind of child care support that we needed to provide, and became in in 1997 and did it. i did not require -- i did not oppose people of the kind to have to work. i do not disagree with that position at all. to say that i have opposed spending cuts is inaccurate. i was governor in 1983 when we were in recession. week lowered the tax on food as a consequence of a significant effort by the legislature. it was every interest group in the state that lined up. spend more money here, there. we held the line. in this campaign, i have endorsed republican proposals to cut spending, by conservative senator from oklahoma tom coburn. us on the way to do it. >> you have 30 seconds. >> this piece of legislation was a signature achievement of president clinton. it was a vote against cutting spending. he did not cut spending than. i
. we did the same thing in 1993. and i worked with john kasic and newt gingrich rich, and it got the job done. we balanced the budget. the unemployment rate was going down and poverty rates were going down. other than that, it didn't work. i didn't like the welfare bill. i voted against it because i didn't believe it provided the kind of child care and work support we needed to provide. we came back in, in 1997, and did it. i don't oppose of people receiving welfare to have to work. i think it is a good thing to do. i was governor in 1983 when we were in recession. we had no tax increase over that food. -- four years. we lowered the tax on ford. the governors will tell you. spend more money here, spend more money there. and we held the line. in this campaign i have endorsed republican proposals to cut spending. the conservative senator from oklahoma. i am proposing to cut congress today. it simply isn't true to say that i haven't supported spending cuts, because i have done plenty of it in the past. >> thank you. senator fisher you have a 30- second rebuttal. >> this was a signat
the nation talks with crist christi, newt gingrich, and marha blackburn. they are brought to you as a public service by the network and c-span. they began at noon eastern with "meet the press," "this week, fox news sunday, state of the union, and face the nation from cbs. you can listen to them all on c- span radio here in the washington, d.c. area. nationwide on xm satellite radio. you can go online to cspanradio.org. >> every nation has -- generation has sacrificed. we were then spending their money. we are now even more -- much more spending their money. we are leaving them a mass that will be a very difficult to deal with hand. just think of who was to come here first and take us over. the last thing i want to see is our country taken over because we are so financially weak we cannot do anything. we are moving in that direction. we are on the edge of the cliff. we have to start fixing it now. otherwise we are leaving a disaster to our children and grandchildren. we could even lose our country. >> ross perot on the economy, the deficit, and the debt and how it has changed since he ran for
? >> that is the third option, and that is to criticize the question as newt gingrich did very effectively in the republican primaries when asked about marital problems. >> it could have said i would kill the son of a -- [laughter] >> one of the purposes of the debate was to actually try to learn something about the candidate you do not already know. what we argue about him is vacation reading included swedish land use planning. i agree absolutely with sandy. but we are a nation of laws. he apparently had a brother that was killed in an automotive who was mugged. of prepared as he was, that is the nature of the presidency. things will happen for which you are not prepared, and i thought it may have been an unfair glimpse, but it was also telling, and i defend the question. >> what does the canada do when a question like that is posed the comes out of left field? it does reach to sometimes the heart of your character or personality? >> i think he did the right thing. there was no pause. there was no interruption. he went straight to the main point of the argument, which is i oppose the deat
bil you had gingrich and clinton in 1997. the other model would be great in 1981, bush 2001, which is to go kick off 10 democratic senators are vice versa i think it would be an interesting question for mitt romney. does he think he has to sit down with harry reid? i think the same for president obama. i think republicans are underestimating how strong obama will be if he is reelected. hold allhink he could the republicans against an obama version of a budget deal. i think that have more leverage over members are around campaign finance issues and other things. i think obama -- even if the democrats don't control all of congress, he would have some leverage to go around leadership. people say bipartisanship, but there are two forms of bipartisanship. one is the leadership negotiant and the other is -- the premise of both of those is, there has to be personal relationships to develop before that can occur. the ambassador pointed out that governor romney will have those talents. i think president obama knows he has them, he will just have to now demonstrate the more. >> so the realit
mean on average. 1/3 of their ads include factual inaccuracies. their ads against newt gingrich which says he supported funds for abortion in china which was not true. his opponent can say i don't know why they ran that ad because it is not true. you have the real potential to move the smaller elections with false information. because it is coming from super back -- supertax, less accountability. you cannot blame directly on the -- on your opponent. we have seen some pretty slimy at coming out of these outside groups. >> tv stations can refuse ads. they cannot refuse ads from a candidate only from outside groups. they almost never do. potentially, someone can be sued for libel if they are not correct. >> you can go pretty far on someone's record and not incur libel. >> we're used to races where candidates are broadcasting at each other. there was press attention in the mccain campaign and-john mccain was being. we did a survey and 60% or less of the more negative. we said the obama people were more negative than mccain. he had so much money he to run negative ads as well as the positi
, rick santorum and newt gingrich. >> we are talking about what the republicans should do but democrats have become more assertive and to this id to predict consumer conservative in this issue. -- assertive in this issue. what the barack obama do this here? he leaned into the issue. he defied those saying we are going to lose downscale white voters if you do this. he did it anyway. the response was quite remarkable. and lead to an uptick among hispanics. lots of praise for a progresses. a put republicans on the defensive. republicans have not only painted themselves into a corner on this but democrats are learning how to take advantage of that. parks downscale whites -- >> downscale whites have not been that alienated from obama. if obama gets elected, the of the large deficit among what -- among young white working-class waters -- workers. how do you keep them down on the farm? they said they need a vision of activist government. how can the republicans consolidate them? this is up for grabs. >> if obama wins, it is almost certain his nine college wide number will go down. it has been
-obama, the pro- gingrich super pac. they talked about and that way. in doing that they increase the accountability of the benefit to canada for the content. they did this in questions in the debate. it was important. it happened in print as well. as of the journalistic community somehow thought -- agreed, and now there is no group that just agrees to these things, that the public would be deceived if he picked up names such as priorities usa, restore our future, as if they had some meaning, and given legitimacy in the process. that translation, which we continue to see when there is talk about third parties, i think it performs an important journalistic function as we try to at least figure out who benefits from this. >> kendall. -- ken doyle. is there any legal obligation or ethical obligation of the people who are running the ads -- running the tv stations running the ads they are receiving, receiving the money, should they be trying to find out at all who is actually paying to air these ads, or in forming their viewers anything about whether it is known or not known who is ac
two candidates on the ballot. santorum and newt gingrich did not qualify. the numbers for ron paul or perhaps a bit better have been other anti-romney choices. that is one reason why mitt romney has to work hard in the state. he has to speak to libertarians . and a constitution candidate. it speaks to the challenges that mitt romney faces in the state. the caller spoke about the nature of the ground game in virginia. you see more people knocking on doors and handing out leaflets. you have many more campaign offices around the state. it speaks to the extent to which virginia is being seen as crucial to both parties. host: joining us is professor stephen farnsworth from mary washington university. tell us about your university. host: we are a small, liberal arts college. we have about 4000 undergraduates. we tend to be pretty selective. students can do internships and summer jobs in richmond or in d.c. it is an opportunity for students to become involved. we have a lot of opportunities. we also, of course -- host: what is the enthusiasm level for this election at your university? gue
know, we've had that before, like when we had gingrich. he reached across the aisle to the other ones. you know, they got to be in between. i believe the republicans got a bad taste, and by not working with them, the democrats ran ramshod. hopefully after this, they have to get together and do a lot of big changes. host: all right. rob, we're going to let you go. our next call will be coming from john on our line for independents, calling from florida this morning. go ahead, john. >> good morning. i just wanted to, first of all, i believe in check and balances in the constitution, and the united states says we should have. i don't want one party running anything. the bottom line is people -- i think 80% of the people in the united states don't even know the constitution, and for limited government, not as a progressive, which, by the way, is what obama is, a progressive, just like hillary clinton, who admitted she was. host: let's not go too far off the rails here. i understand that the constitution, the check and balances that the constitution refers to is between the legislative, th
for the republican revolution of 1994, because it was the republicans under newt gingrich who adopted a lot of your tactics and positions. then it was recently we had tea party movement. that was a movement within a political party. do you think it takes that kind of a movement? i am wondering what your thoughts were when the tea party revolution rose up in 2009? >> interesting to see that happen. i was surprised. it has had an interesting impact, don't you think? >> yes, interesting. >> not the solution, but it was a healthy thing to happen. >> that shows that average americans are -- >> it wakes up a lot of american citizens. >> my personal view is that he party and the occupy movement had a lot in common. because they are both concerned with a lack of integrity and accountability. in the case of the tea party, they are concerned with the lack of accountability in government. in the case of occupy, is wall street, and guess what -- they are both right. >> he summed it up beautifully. >> when you were running, it was a matter of people getting to call into an 800-number. now we're into this world
of these pacs may have come in the primaries were they really transformed republican primaries. newt gingrich and rick santorum almost certainly were not at stake in the race as long as they did after losing several contests in each case with out a million air or four backing them with checks as high as $5 million. as a result, the republican primary was much more prolonged than it would have been. romney and his friends have to spend much more money than they expected defending him in those early months. the whole dynamic of what we are used to wear we have a nominee, we are up in it for a few weeks. since then, the super pak sets and in a huge wave is sumner. when romney wins, he does not have the money he needs to compete with obama. he relied heavily on super pacs to do is advertising. this is not technically coordinated advertising. trevor can get into the realities there. it had some obvious positive affect inholding parity with the president as he issued a blistering attack against romney this summer. it has shown to have clear weaknesses. both campaigns will tell you this. the super p
, gingrich is made to go out and vote -- so it convinces me to go out and vote. guest: the next cover story will deal with precisely this subject. the libertarian party is working to get permanently on balance. these are perfectly good reasons to vote expressively. unfortunately, it will not determine the outcome of the election that is dominated by two parties. newell also not get the libertarian vote on the ballot -- you will also not get the libertarian vote on the ballot in your state. even when we are talking about third parties, smaller scale elections, the numbers are still pretty big. again, though, very happy for anybody who enjoys wearing their "i voted" sticker. and anyone likes to vote for the libertarian guy, by all means, but understand you are not influencing who gets on the ballot. catherine mangu-ward is the managing editor of reason magazine. if you encourage people not to vote, do you risk having the candidates that you prefer losing the election be on the ballot? are you responsible, basically, for a loss for your party? guest: the idea that if you are the one to blame i
in 1993. and i worked with john kasic and newt gingrich rich, and it got the job done. we balanced the budget. we were paying off debt. the economy was growing. the unemployment rate was going down and poverty rates were going down. other than that, it didn't work. i didn't like the welfare bill. i voted against it because i didn't believe it provided the kind of child care and work support we needed to provide. we came back in, in 1997, and did it. idon't oppose of people-- don't oppose at all. receiving welfare to have to work. i think it is a good thing to do. i was governor in 1983 when we were in recession. we had no tax increase over that food. -- over that four years. we lowered the tax on ford. -- food. the governors will tell you. spend more money here, spend more money there. and we held the line. in this campaign i have endorsed republican proposals to cut spending. the conservative senator from oklahoma. i am proposing to cut congress today. it simply isn't true to say that i haven't supported spending cuts, because i have done plenty of it in the past. >> thank you. se
. people had gone to the web and looked up what newt gingrich was talking about. >> another question -- recently, one of mitt romney's operatives made the statement to reporters when they were pushing him on the claim about welfare. we will keep running that, we will not have our campaign did but -- dictated by fact checkers. probably a lot of news people were shocked by the cynicism they heard coming out of his mouth. jim, you have been around the longest -- did this surprise you? >> i really cannot say that i was. they had kind of behave that way all along. they were certainly not terribly worried enough to change the rhetoric when something is pointed out to them. >> you mean the romney campaign? >> yes. i do not see a lot of evidence of trimming statements back to make a more accurate when they are repeated -- >> i do not know about that. this is -- my take on this, in the context of that question and answer, they were saying that this is the most effective ad. they said, that got four pinocchios. the response was, we are not going to let our campaign be dictated by fact checkers
the question as newt gingrich did very effectively in the republican primaries when asked about marital problems. >> it could have said i would kill the son of a -- [laughter] >> one of the purposes of the debate was to actually try to learn something about the candidate you do not already know. what we argue about him is vacation reading included swedish land use planning. i agree absolutely with sandy. i would have wanted to kill him, but we are a nation of laws. he apparently had a brother that was killed in an automotive accident and another relative who was mugged. as of was that question was and of prepared as he was, that is the nature of the presidency. things will happen for which you are not prepared, and i thought it may have been an unfair glimpse, but it was also telling, and i defend the question. >> what does the canada do when a question like that is posed the comes out of left field? it does reach to sometimes the heart of your character or personality? >> i think he did the right thing. there was no pause. there was no interruption. he went straight to the main point o
Search Results 0 to 22 of about 23 (some duplicates have been removed)

Terms of Use (10 Mar 2001)